571 



together with all the debate and discussions. The consensus among scientists participating 



in that program was that overall "tar" and nicotine reduction was the most effective and 



most appropriate approach. Several scientists, including Dr. Dietrich Hoffmann, 



acknowledged the responsiveness of the tobacco industry: 



I do think the tobacco industry, voluntary or not, adjusts very 

 well to the demands of the logical reasoning of the scientific 

 community and that we should continue on this path.* 



In Dr. Kessler's March 25, 1994 statement, he asked the cigarette companies to 

 address the intent of cigarette design developments. The clear intent behind cigarette 

 design developments has been and remains to manufacture and market a broad range of 

 cigarette products in response to the demands and tastes of today's adult smokers and to 

 ensure cigarette to cigarette and pack to pack consistency within a brand. Within the 

 universe of cigarette products, there is a range of "tar" and nicotine levels. As noted earlier, 

 reducing "tar" yields automatically results in roughly proportional reductions in nicotine 

 yields. That is seen by the dramatic reduction in both "tar" and nicotine achieved, by 

 Reynolds Tobacco and other cigarette manufacturers since. 1955. 



In 1957, Dr. Ernst Wynder and others called for efforts to reduce "tar": 



[F]or practical purposes, a filter-tip capable of filtering out 40 

 percent of the tar would be a step in the right direction .... 

 "Such a filter-tip . . . placed on a regular-size cigarette which 

 normally yields 30 milligrams of tar in its smoke, would reduce 

 the smoker's tar exposure to about 18 milligrams. A reduction 

 to that level, as shown both by animal experiments and human 



* Dietrich Hoffmaim, Discussion in "Risk Reduction Achievements", Banbury Report 

 3 - A Safe Cigarette?, pp. 155-178 at 174 (1980). 



-10- 



